Goals of children with unilateral cerebral palsy in a brain stimulation arm rehabilitation trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To explore relationships between category classifications for children's rehabilitation goals, outcomes, and participant characteristics. METHOD: Children with hemiparetic cerebral palsy due to perinatal stroke rated self-selected goals with the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) and completed the Assisting Hand Assessment (AHA) and Box and Block Test (BBT), at baseline and 6 months, in a randomized, controlled 10-day neuromodulation rehabilitation trial using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Goals were classified with the Canadian Model of Occupational Performance and Engagement and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Analysis included standard linear regression. RESULTS: Data for 45 participants (mean age 11y 7mo, SD 3y 10mo, range 6-19y, 29 males, 16 females) on 186 goals were included. Self-care goal percentage corresponded with baseline BBT by age (standardized ß=-0.561, p=0.004). Leisure goal percentage corresponded with baseline BBT (standardized ß=0.419, p=0.010). AHA change corresponded with productivity goals (standardized ß=0.327, p=0.029) and age (standardized ß=0.481, p=0.002). COPM change corresponded with baseline COPM and age by AHA change (p<0.05). INTERPRETATION: Younger children with lower motor function were more likely to select self-care goals while those with better function tended to select leisure goals. Functional improvement corresponded with older age and productivity goals. COPM change scores reflected functional improvement among older children. Children chose functionally and developmentally appropriate goals. Consequently, children should be free to set goals that matter to them. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Children in a brain stimulation trial chose divergent upper extremity functional goals. Younger children with lower ability chose more self-care goals. Children with higher ability chose more leisure goals. Older children's goal ratings reflected objective functional motor gains. Children chose goals appropriate to their function and level of development.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".